Re: The Breaststroke Lane

You're talking about Wally? The guy who at Y Nats was DQ'd on the 200 breast, said "are you f-ing kidding me?!" and was ejected from the rest of the meet after his first event? lol

It sounds like you heard this story passed down through too many tellings. It wasn't Y Nats (it was USMS Nats in 1997). It wasn't after his first event (it was on the last day after his last ind event). He was ejected for cursing, however, so that part is true. In my post I was referring to him getting DQd two or three times at the Albatross over the years and just shrugging those off.

I'm sorry for assuming the alleged infraction took place on the first length. I never heard any details of the DQ but I did see your first length so that is what I thought happened. That's what happens when you make assumptions I guess! My apologies.

Wolfy - it really doesn't matter to me who made the protest, that wasn't my question. I was simply asking Fort how she would have felt if the judge said she took one kick and two pulls and then edited the DQ slip accordingly. Would that have made her feel any better?

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

Originally Posted by jroddin

I'm not sure I understand what your intention was with protesting the wording on the DQ slip.

As an official, I have seen many instances where a DQ was protested and overturned on the basis of an incorrectly written DQ slip. Therefore it is always worth the effort to protest on this basis. Especially if the swimmer is sure that he/she did a legal swim.

I have entered the snapdragon stage of my life (Part of me has snapped and the rest of me is draggin ).

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

Originally Posted by jroddin

It sounds like you heard this story passed down through too many tellings. It wasn't Y Nats (it was USMS Nats in 1997). It wasn't after his first event (it was on the last day after his last ind event). He was ejected for cursing, however, so that part is true. In my post I was referring to him getting DQd two or three times at the Albatross over the years and just shrugging those off.

I'm sorry for assuming the alleged infraction took place on the first length. I never heard any details of the DQ but I did see your first length so that is what I thought happened. That's what happens when you make assumptions I guess! My apologies.

Wolfy - it really doesn't matter to me who made the protest, that wasn't my question. I was simply asking Fort how she would have felt if the judge said she took one kick and two pulls and then edited the DQ slip accordingly. Would that have made her feel any better?

Poor Ande's thread has been completely hijacked!

I heard it from his wife!

Ande's thread is not hijacked. We're discussing evil pulldowns and how to do them properly and also now to avoid DQs.

Uh, if an S&T judge says the DQ is for X and then changes his/her mind and says the DQ was for Y (and, oh, yeah, I guess maybe I didn't see X), a Ref tosses out that DQ slip. They have to be certain and specific on a call. The S&T didn't even indicate what length it was on on the DQ slip, which you are supposed to. I had to ask him. He messed up; it happens.

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

Originally Posted by jroddin

Wolfy - it really doesn't matter to me who made the protest, that wasn't my question. I was simply asking Fort how she would have felt if the judge said she took one kick and two pulls and then edited the DQ slip accordingly. Would that have made her feel any better?

Editing a DQ slip? Are you serious?

If there is any doubt about the veracity of a call then that DQ should get pocketed by the ref 10 out of 10 times. And I have done just that on many occasions.

With regards to reviewing the slip and portesting based upon how the slip was written, you are missing the point which was that '2 complete cycles underwater' does not outline which of the defined (and this is THE key here) stroke rules were violated.

There are rules for all strokes but there are also rules on how those stroke rules are enforced.

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

Paul - I have no experience with DQs - either from an officiating standpoint or receiving them. So that is why I was asking naive questions. My analogy is let's say you get caught speeding. The cop says you were going 70 in a 55 zone and you ask, "are you sure I wasn't going 65?" If he says, "ok, yes, my mistake you were only going 65." You're still busted so why ask the question? I guess I got hung up with why Fort asked if the official wasn't confused and perhaps it was only one kick but two pulls (since two pulls is still illegal). But now I see you are saying if they change their story it is grounds for dismissal. I did not know that but now I do. Thanks for the clarification.

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

Originally Posted by jroddin

Paul - I have no experience with DQs - either from an officiating standpoint or receiving them. So that is why I was asking naive questions. My analogy is let's say you get caught speeding. The cop says you were going 70 in a 55 zone and you ask, "are you sure I wasn't going 65?" If he says, "ok, yes, my mistake you were only going 65." You're still busted so why ask the question? I guess I got hung up with why Fort asked if the official wasn't confused and perhaps it was only one kick but two pulls (since two pulls is still illegal). But now I see you are saying if they change their story it is grounds for dismissal. I did not know that but now I do. Thanks for the clarification.

Jeff

I shouldn't have been DQ'd on your hypothesized subsumed basis either.

And in this case it is irrelevant since the official stuck with his story that I took 2 breaststroke kicks.

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

Originally Posted by jroddin

Paul - I have no experience with DQs - either from an officiating standpoint or receiving them. So that is why I was asking naive questions. My analogy is let's say you get caught speeding. The cop says you were going 70 in a 55 zone and you ask, "are you sure I wasn't going 65?" If he says, "ok, yes, my mistake you were only going 65." You're still busted so why ask the question? I guess I got hung up with why Fort asked if the official wasn't confused and perhaps it was only one kick but two pulls (since two pulls is still illegal). But now I see you are saying if they change their story it is grounds for dismissal. I did not know that but now I do. Thanks for the clarification.

Jeff

It's more like, you get caught speeding but the officer doesn't fill out the ticket correctly, say by putting the incorrect street or time of day or incorrect day of the week. You go to court and it will get thrown out if the error in filling out the ticket is identified. It's goes to reasonable doubt and even more so in swimming, it's benefit of the doubt to the swimmer.

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

All of this is why I have gone back to doing my dolphin kick near the end of my pulldown. There are judges out there that seem to have it in for anybody that appears to benefit from doing the dolphin kick at the beginning of the pulldown. It's not worth it.

This is also a reason why I'm happy to see the speed suits go. Nobody will be going 18 meters underwater on their second length pulldown without one of those suckers on (unless they are going VERY slowly).

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

Originally Posted by Midas

All of this is why I have gone back to doing my dolphin kick near the end of my pulldown. There are judges out there that seem to have it in for anybody that appears to benefit from doing the dolphin kick at the beginning of the pulldown. It's not worth it.

This is also a reason why I'm happy to see the speed suits go. Nobody will be going 18 meters underwater on their second length pulldown without one of those suckers on (unless they are going VERY slowly).

One person's caution is another person's risk taking ... I choose the latter course.

And I didn't go 18 meters on the second length, as you would have seen if you had read the prior posts more carefully. It was the first 25. But are you so sure of your assertion? I swam 2 50s frees this weekend at the end of each day, one in a B70 and one in a kneeskin. Only .1 difference. The pre-kick in evil makes a difference for risk taking dolphin kickers.

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

I always scope out the officials ahead of time to see if I am seeded nearest the official who doesn't seem to be paying attention (I swim at a lot of USA-S meets with younger kids, and the officials a lot of times are busy watching their kids race and not the lanes they are in charge of). If i draw the official with his/her head in the clouds, I will work in a second (I have been known to sneak in a third on a few occasions) just for the extra speed.

Yes, I guess since it is against the rulebook, it is "cheating", but I always see "cheating" in our sport is more using performance enhancing drugs (and, dare I say it, "suits"). I see myself bending an already ludicrous rule which was better left alone. Lets see, an olympian does an illegal pullout, wins gold, and then FINA turns around and legalizes what the swimmer did. I was fine without the dolphin kick.

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

Originally Posted by Calvin S

I always scope out the officials ahead of time to see if I am seeded nearest the official who doesn't seem to be paying attention (I swim at a lot of USA-S meets with younger kids, and the officials a lot of times are busy watching their kids race and not the lanes they are in charge of). If i draw the official with his/her head in the clouds, I will work in a second (I have been known to sneak in a third on a few occasions) just for the extra speed.

Yes, I guess since it is against the rulebook, it is "cheating", but I always see "cheating" in our sport is more using performance enhancing drugs (and, dare I say it, "suits"). I see myself bending an already ludicrous rule which was better left alone. Lets see, an olympian does an illegal pullout, wins gold, and then FINA turns around and legalizes what the swimmer did. I was fine without the dolphin kick.

I'm sorry,but deliberately breaking the rules to gain an advantage is wrong.The fact Olympic officials are gutless and FINA is complicit doesn't make it right.

Re: The Breaststroke Lane

If there is any doubt about the veracity of a call then that DQ should get pocketed by the ref 10 out of 10 times. And I have done just that on many occasions.

With regards to reviewing the slip and portesting based upon how the slip was written, you are missing the point which was that '2 complete cycles underwater' does not outline which of the defined (and this is THE key here) stroke rules were violated.

There are rules for all strokes but there are also rules on how those stroke rules are enforced.

I agree. I actually had a DQ slip I wrote rejected because the DQ slip on top of it "bled through" (they are carbon) thus making the DQ slip a bit confusing.

The rules are pretty clear on strokes. If it takes some sort of editing or re-explanation or nuanced call, it probably shouldn't be a DQ.